CATAMOUNT : EXPERIENCES OF LGBTQ+ FACULTY & STAFF @ WCU
Dean Paulk, B.S.
ABSTRACT
This phenomenological study was developed to capture the
experiences of out LGBTQ+ faculty and staff at Western Carolina
University, a regionally comprehensive institution in a politically
conservative region. Six (6) faculty and staff members from across
campus were interviewed and asked questions in regard to their
interactions with and level of “outness” with students and
colleagues. Many common themes emerged, and it is clear from
the analysis that these faculty and staff members have had mostly
positive experiences on campus and feel and recommend that
LGBTQ+ faculty and staff are out with their students and
colleagues (if they feel safe to do so) to serve as positive role
models for LGBTQ+ students. This study served to demonstrate an
overall positive atmosphere for LGBTQ+ faculty and staff at WCU.
BACKGROUND INFORMATION
The LGBTQ+ community has a long and complex history in the
United States, but LGBTQ+ research in higher education is still an
ever-evolving and growing field (Renn, 2010). In the literature, a
relationship has been shown between one’s level of outness,
internalized homophobia, and feeling of being supported and
valued (Denato, Craig, Messinger, Lloyd, & McInroy, 2014; Orlov &
Allen, 2014; Sears, 2002; Weber-Gilmore, Rose, & Rubinstein,
2011). This shows that one is more likely to be out when one has
overcome internalized thoughts and behaviors, and that being out
to one’s peers and students is beneficial to one’s wellbeing and to
the students.
THEORETICAL FRAMEWORK
College is a time when many students are developing their own
personal identities, including identity as a member of the LGBTQ+
community. Faculty and staff are also undergoing their own
developmental processes. D’Augelli (1994) and Bildeau (2005)
detail this process within their models. This research directly looks
at how LGBTQ+ faculty and staff move through the “developing a
LGB/trans social identity” stage of these models, focusing on the
work environment; this research also indirectly looks at how
LGBTQ+ faculty and staff can best support students moving
through the first two stages, “exiting LGB/trans identity” and
“developing a personal LGB/trans identity,” (Bildeau, 2005;
D’Augelli, 1994).
PARTICIPANTS
The participants in this study included six (6) faculty and staff
members from various departments across campus. Participants
were recruited through a sample of convenience, utilizing the
researcher’s personal network of out LGBTQ+ faculty and staff at
WCU. Four (4) staff members and two (2) faculty members were
interviewed. Identities included: “queer”, “cisgender queer man”,
“gay”, “gay male”, “transmasculine”, and “gay cisgender male”.
Master’s Candidate, Higher Education Student Affairs
Western Carolina University
METHODOLOGY IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE
This research was conducted to answer the question: What are the experiences of out LGBTQ+ faculty and staff at a The information garnered from this research is useful for LGBTQ+
regionally comprehensive institution in a politically conservative region? Participants were interviewed one-on-one and staff and faculty who are thinking of working at an institution like
asked a series of questions related to identity, coming out, level of “outness,” experiences being out to students and WCU, whether the individual is moving from one institution to
colleagues, benefits and drawbacks of being out to students, experiences at other institutions, and advice to LGBTQ+ another, or is seeking employment at a college or university for the
faculty and staff considering employment at an institution like WCU. Interviews were transcribed and coded by the first time. Knowing that there are more benefits than drawbacks to
researcher, and verified with the participants to ensure interpretive validity. Quotes were extracted to ensure descriptive being out to students is helpful when one is making the decision on
validity. whether or not to be out on one’s campus. Out LGBTQ+ faculty and
staff serve as visible role models for students who are early in their
The biggest limitation of this study was the sample. Heavily involved faculty and staff may have more positive perceptions
development, and may be coming out for the very first time, or
of an institution, as they are the change makers on campus. Another limitation is that most of the participants were male
trying to navigate and find their own place within the LGBTQ+
or masculine-identified. Lastly, the majority of the participants were staff. A larger sample size that is more evenly
community in a politically conservative region.
distributed could help to provide a more comprehensive picture of the LGBTQ+ population on campus.
FINDINGS
Theme 1: OUTNESS SUGGESTIONS FOR FUTURE RESEARCH
Respondents began coming out from high school up until graduate school, with the majority of them coming out for the
The interviews of the participants who were not male or masculine
first time in college (undergrad and graduate). The majority of respondents (5/6) are out in all contexts (professionally
and personally), but may have moments of caution depending on the situation. identified who have worked at WCU for a short period of time
expressed more hesitation and less comfort with feeling supported
“Yeah, I'm very out. It's certainly one of “…it's nice to work in a place “So I think to be in the closet isn't by WCU in general. Future research could focus on the differences
my salient identities.” where I feel like I can be…out healthy for yourself or them between gender identity and/or time worked at the institution to
and…celebrated.” [students].” compare and contrast the answers from each group to see if these
differences are common for these subpopulations.
Theme 2: ATMOSPHERE
Conducting a full-scale LGBTQ+ climate assessment would provide a
Respondents overall felt that WCU is a welcoming community, and most (5/6) feel comfortable being out on campus and
more comprehensive picture of the feelings and experiences of
in the surrounding community. One respondent feels uncomfortable being out on campus and anywhere outside of
faculty, staff, and students, including not only the LGBTQ+
Asheville and one mentioned that body language of others has been a concern in the past.
community, but the whole of the campus community.
“I’m just…very grateful to WCU and the “It's mostly been accepting and welcoming…a few “I'm happy and
open community that it is and faculty and staff…their body language does not satisfied here.”
supportive community that it is.” match their what they're saying to your face…”
REFERENCES
Theme 3: AUTHENTICITY D’Augelli, A. R. (1994). Identity development and sexual orientation: Toward a
All of the respondents’ advice centered around being authentic, open, and out (if possible) to students and others and model of lesbian, gay, and bisexual development. In Trickett, A. J., Watts,
that doing so can serve as an important model for students who are developing their own personal identity/identities. R. J., & Birman, D. (Eds.), Human diversity: Perspectives on people in
context (pp. 312-333). San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
“…for people who are in a position where they're “…be authentic. Let “…if you're someone who feels Bildeau, B. (2005). Beyond the gender binary: A case study of two
able to be out...if they have…the privilege to be able people just feel who comfortable and confident being transgender students at a midwestern research university. Journal of Gay
to be out and visible to students and to, to have you are…” that torch bearer…I think that and Lesbian Issues in Education, 3(1), 29-44.
visible representation. I think that's really it's important and needed.” Dentato, M. P., Craig, S. L., Messinger, L, Lloyd, M., & McInroy, L. B. (2014).
important.” Outness among LGBTQ social work students in North America: The
contribution of environmental supports and perceptions of comfort.
Theme 4: BOUNDARIES Social Work Education, 33(4), 485-501.
Most of the respondents advised that boundaries are important when working with students (particularly as a LGBTQ+- Sears, J. T. (2002). The institutional climate for lesbian, gay and bisexual
identified person working with LGBTQ+ identified students. Some experienced instances with students pushing education faculty: What is the pivotal frame of reference? Journal of
boundaries (expecting preferential treatment or making inappropriate advances). Homosexuality, 43(1), 11-37.
Orlov, J. M. & Allen, K. R. (2014). Being who I am: Effective teaching, learning,
“…the gay world already lets us be “I think that one would be more careful… “I have students who student support, and societal change through LGBQ faculty freedom.
more thoughtful about sex and our about student relationships…Because identify as LGBTQ in my Journal of Homosexuality, 61, 1025-1052.
desires and more open about them there's more heightened awareness today classrooms who…seem
Renn, K. A. (2010). LGBT and queer research in higher education: The state
because we've had to consider of appearance of being inappropriate... to expect some and status of the field. Educational Researcher, 39(2), 132-141.
them...And so people feel a bit more boundaries as far as how I related to preferential treatment
Weber-Gilmore, G., Rose, S., & Rubinstein, R. (2011). The impact of
brazen sometimes to say and request students probably has changed over the when they're
internalized homophobia on outness for lesbian, gay, and bisexual
things that are not appropriate.” years.” struggling…” individuals. The Professional Counselor, 1(3), 163-175.